 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Sir Og
|
|
Lurking in Stara Zagora, Bulgaria
Jun 2001
time: 07:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by cyclotron7
Nothing here does anything to make the game more difficult. Armies don't change anything about difficulty, and making cities harder to take (which, incidentally, Firaxis did by culture flip) doesn't count for jack when the AI might as well have cardboard units if it is a few techs behind. You have addressed nothing that actually changes the ease with which the game is beaten. |
I didn’t say that armies would make the game more difficult, I just said that that’s what was missing in civ2 combat system.
In every civ game so far the support for units was the same no matter if they are in your cities or 10 000 km away. But if you have to pay more to support your armies/units that you have sent to war it will be a lot harder to wage constant war. If it’s also harder to keep captured winning by military conquest becomes a lot harder.
quote:
In Civ2, the only reason the AI was so handiy beaten was because it essentially became a joke if it fell a few techs behind... Civ3 fixed this. |
An advantage of few techs was not enough to easily beat the AI. But if the AI was a whole age behind than it deserved to be annihilated.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sir Og
|
|
Lurking in Stara Zagora, Bulgaria
Jun 2001
time: 07:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tiberius
What's your problem with the resource system? It is one of the best addition to the Civ series. |
I don’t like the idea that you need resources to produce your units. In the real world resources are abundant. Even the smallest countries have almost all the resources they need and the ones they don’t have they can easily acquire by trade.
I think that resources should be in the game and they should be worth fighting for but not by being a prerequisite for unit production. They should only change the “price” of the units. That is if a civ has a lot of resources it will have higher productivity and will produce more units than a country with fewer resources.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DanaLea
|
 |
Las Vegas
Oct 2002
time: 05:22
|
|
first a disclaimer: I did not read all 10 pages of this thread. I read the first two and a half and the last - hope I'm not repeating anything already in this thread.
here's my idea on how to re-do the combat system. you know, for that make-believe world where Fraxis comes to me and asks me how to make it better. keep the A/D as it is, but add one element. give each unit a number. the low warrior would be one, spearmen two, and so on, so no number is duplicated and each unit's number corresponds (roughly) with where it is in the progression of weak to strong. now, when two units face each other, their numbers are compared. if they are within a given range (say plus or minus 4) then combat ensues as normal. if the numbers are outside the range, then the unit with the small number is simply destroyed. perhaps with a small chance of the unit surrendering and being captured. this will prevent a spearmen from beating a tank, but won't affect a pikeman/tank battle (assuming their numbers are close enough)
what do y'all think of this?
-dana
why isn't there a spell checker in these forums?!?
Last edited by DanaLea on 31-10-2002 at 15:38
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zachriel
|
 |
U.S.A.
Dec 2001
time: 00:22
|
|
- dp -
Last edited by Zachriel on 31-10-2002 at 18:05
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zachriel
|
|
U.S.A.
Dec 2001
time: 00:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Og
I don’t like the idea that you need resources to produce your units. In the real world resources are abundant. Even the smallest countries have almost all the resources they need and the ones they don’t have they can easily acquire by trade. |
The availability of strategic resources in the modern world is due to the strong global trading network. This is the results of several wars over resources that have guaranteed availability of these resources. It has not always been that way, nor is there any guarantee it will stay that way.
- Japan has no natural sources of oil or rubber. The Allies cut off their trade in these resources during the 1930's. The Japanese considered this an act of war and attacked. This is considered one important cause of WWII.
- Rome invaded Britain, in large part to acquire the Tin mines. Tin was even more important during the Bronze Age.
- The Confederacy was reduced to using urine for the manufacture of Gunpowder due to a lack of Saltpeter.
- After WWI, France exerted various levels of political control of the Ruhr, a major German coal and industrial region.
- Ancient Egypt had no wood. Egypt had to maintain good relations with or friendly political relations with Lebanon.
- The U.S. wrested control of the West from Mexico largely because of the Gold and Silver there.
- When Kuwait was invaded, the West intervened because of a strategic resource, oil. When war broke out in sub-Saharan Africa -- even to the point of genocide -- the West stood by. No strategic resources.
Last edited by Zachriel on 31-10-2002 at 18:09
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sir Og
|
|
Lurking in Stara Zagora, Bulgaria
Jun 2001
time: 07:22
|
|
Zachriel: I think that even in ancient times there was an adequate trade network that distributed the goods. And in the examples you gave each country was actually able to build a significant amount of the units that need those resources even though they didn’t have deposits of the resource on their territory.
That’s why I think that you should always be able to build any unit but if you don’t have the resource it should be more expensive maybe ( like prototypes in SMAC).
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22.
Apolyton Time is 00:22. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
30-10-2002 17:14
Attachment: 
|
